Contours of Energy Inequality, Anil Agarwal Dialogue 2015

CONTOURS OF INEQUALITY
What Census 2011 tells about India’s energy poverty
Anil Agarwal Dialogue 2015

Introduction 5
Why we need to be serious about energy poverty
CHAPTER 1
The energy divide 8
Chronic power deprivation in some districts raises serious policy issues
CHAPTER 2
How India cooks its food 11
The disparity between India and Bharat is glaring when one looks at the
fuel used for cooking
CHAPTER 3
State matters 18
An analysis of the states that are faring well and the ones that are not
in sourcing energy
CONCLUSION 53
Energy access must be treated as investment for overall human development
Contents

Writers: S B Agnihotri and P C Maithani
Editors: Kaushik Dasgupta, Aruna P Sharma and Rajit Sengupta
Cover illustration: Tarique Aziz
Design and layout: Kirpal Singh and Surender Singh
© 2015 Centre for Science and Environment
Material from this publication can be used, but with acknowledgement.
Published by
Centre for Science and Environment
41, Tughlakabad Institutional Area
New Delhi 110 062
Phones: 91-11-29955124, 29955125, 29953394
Fax: 91-11-29955879
E-mail: cse@cseindia.org
Website: www.cseindia.org
Printed at Multi Colour Services, New Delhi
We are grateful to the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida)
for institutional support

5
A
ccess to energy is an important determinant of quality of life. Inequality of access
to energy for cooking, lighting and livelihood purposes has engaged the attention
of researchers, policy planners and activists in recent years. In 2005, India
launched the ambitious Rajiv Gandhi Grameen Vidyutikaran Yojana that aimed at universal
access to electricity by 2009. Similarly, efforts towards universal access to modern cooking
energy were initiated by creating a liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) distribution network and
deploying renewable energy-based cooking energy solutions. Internationally too, in April
2011, the UN General Assembly declared 2012 as the International Year of Sustainable
Energy for All.
Increased realisation of the futility of business-as-usual approach—expanding conventional
energy infrastructure, particularly power—has led to a serious search for alternatives.
Renewable energy solutions provide one such promising alternative.
But before coming to solutions, it is important to assess the nature and extent of the
problem in the Indian context. This can be done at three levels:
■ Macro,
■ Meso, using data sets such as the National Sample Survey Office survey,
■ Micro, using the Census data at the district and the sub-district levels and, if possible,
at the village level.
The macro picture indicates the gravity of the problem. To begin with, we will concentrate
on this. According to Census 2001, as many as 84.7 million households did not have access
to electricity. In Census 2011, the figure has reduced marginally to 80.7 million households.
A break-up of the country’s population into rural and urban segments indicates that about
75 million rural households (44.7 per cent of rural population) do not have access to
electricity, while only 5.8 million urban households (7.3 per cent of urban population) lack
such access. This makes the extent of rural-urban inequality obvious.
The fraction of non-commercial energy in the consumption basket is another macro
indicator. Energy forms that are not sold in the regulated markets and are usually produced
and consumed by an individual household are referred to as non-commercial energy. Use
of non-commercial energy has increased in absolute terms from 74 MTOE (million tonnes of
oil equivalent) in 1961 to 174 MTOE in 2011. But it has decreased in per capita terms from
169 KGOE (kilograms of oil equivalent) in 1961 to about 144 KGOE in 2011—not a significant
decrease (see ‘Skewed energy equations’ p6).
Here it would be pertinent to point out that the latest McKinsey report in January 2014
puts the current consumption of non-commercial energy at 160 MTOE. The report also
reckons that consumption will stay at 160 MTOE till 2030 in a business-as-usual scenario.
Even in an optimistic scenario aiming at energy independence, consumption of non-
commercial energy is projected to decrease only to 147 MTOE. It is apparent that the segment
using non-commercial energy is no one’s concern.
This can be further elaborated when we look at the meso picture. The economic decile-wise
energy consumption among rural and urban households not just reveals the rural versus urban
consumption inequality, but also shows the intra-rural and the intra-urban consumption
inequality (see ‘Average electricity consumption per household per month’ p7). The data makes
Introduction

6
REGIONS
WHERE
MORE THAN 50%
HOUSEHOLDS
USE KEROSENE
FOR LIGHTING
India’s consumption
of non-commercial energy
200
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
1961 1971 1981 1991 2001 2011
Census year
(figures in million tonnes of oil equivalent)
Consumptioninkilogramsofoilequivalent
250
200
150
100
50
0
169.4
158.2
144.5
206.6
197.5
207.4
194.4
183.9
209.1
1961 1971 1981 1991 2001 2011
Rural populationTotal population
Per capita consumption trend of non-commercial energy
159.1
132.8
144.0
Source:CensusofIndiaforpopulationdataandPlanning
Commissiondatafornon-commercialenergy
2001
2011
Skewedenergyequations45 per cent of rural
population still depends
on non-commercial
energy sources because
it does not have access
to electricity
74.38
86.72
108.48
122.07
136.64
174.2
GRAPHIC: VIVEK BHARDWAJ

7
it clear that there is considerable inequality in energy consumption per household per annum
in the rural area. What is more dramatic is the regional inequality in the access to electricity for
lighting purposes in rural households. A compact cluster of districts in the eastern and northern
regions had nearly half the households using kerosene for lighting in 2011 because they lack
access (see ‘A constant problem’). This data reinforces the urgency of eradicating basic energy
poverty, especially since deprivation in this cluster is a strongly enduring one: even in 2001, it
was nearly the same cluster where more than 50 per cent households were using kerosene as
source of lighting.
Average electricity consumption per household per month
(Not per capita per month; given that lower income deciles have larger household size
the consumption inequality is even more glaring in per capita terms)
Monthly per capita
expenditure (MPCE) by
decile (in `)
Decile class
of MPCE
Electricity consumed
per household
(excludes non-consuming
households) (in kWh)
Electricity consumed
per household
(includes all households)
(in Kilowatt hour or kWh)
Rural Urban
505 707
664 979
774 1,192
876 1,401
977 1,632
1,100 1,908
1,249 2,246
1,452 2,730
1,786 3,563
3,409 7,639
Rural Urban
35 53
40 66
42 76
43 85
49 93
52 103
56 111
59 114
67 135
81 196
Rural Urban
16 43
22 61
25 73
29 82
35 90
40 101
44 108
50 111
58 133
75 194
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
664 979 40 66 22 612
Rural Urban Rural Urban Rural Urban
876 1,401 43 85 29 824
1,100 1,908 52 103 40 1016
3,409 7,639 81 196 75 19410
1,452 2,730 59 114 50 1118
Source: Census of India for population data and Planning Commission data for non-commercial energy
A constant problem
Several districts in eastern and northern regions have high dependency on kerosene for lighting
Regions where more than 50%
households use kerosene as source
of lighting in 2001
of lighting in 20011

8
T
he data from Census 2001 and 2011 are good indicators of energy use in the country.
The data show that Indians use firewood, crop residue, cow dung cake, kerosene, LPG
and coal—lignite, charcoal and biogas—as fuel sources.
Electricity, followed by kerosene, fulfills lighting needs of most households in the country.
Other sources, including solar light, account for a very small fraction. The census data also
categorises households as “No lighting”. But this category is very small numerically—
ideally, it should have been near zero.
Given the relatively straightforward distribution of lighting sources, it will be convenient
to take up this category first. The set of maps (‘What lights India’ p9) shows states in terms
of use of electricity and kerosene as a source of lighting: high, medium and low. For
example, the first map (see ‘Districts that lack electricity make up with kerosene’ p9) shows
low electricity use in a contiguous patch in northern and north-eastern India, Uttar
Pradesh, Bihar, Jharkhand, Odisha, West Bengal and Assam (shown in red in the first map
in the set). Kerosene use, concomitantly, is high in these areas (green in the second map in
the set). Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh occupy an intermediate position in
terms of electricity use (yellow in the first map) while most southern and western states
and the northern states of Punjab, Haryana Himachal and Jammu and Kashmir show high
electricity use (green in the first map). This pattern persists for both rural and urban areas.
The pattern becomes sharper once we look at the district-level in the next set of maps (see
‘Scenario improved since 2001, but not enough’ p9). The map on the left depicts the cluster
of districts by percentage of households using electricity as a source of lighting. In a large
segment of districts shown in green, electricity is the main source of lighting for more than
80 per cent of the households. But in another compact cluster, shown in red, less than 47
per cent households have such access.
As any discerning reader would realise, this is quite the same cluster where more than
47 per cent households use kerosene as the major source of lighting. The map on the right
in this set is somewhat similar. The latter map depicts the situation in 2001 but here
districts shown in green are the ones where electricity is a major source of lighting in more
than 67 per cent of households. What is more interesting is the compact cluster shown in
red where such access was available to less than 25 per cent households.
The two maps tell us that the situation has no doubt improved since 2001 but the cluster
of the deprived districts has remained more or less the same. This is a repeatedly recurring
pattern; while the levels of deprivation decrease, the locus of deprivation endures far more
strongly. This is a serious challenge to policy makers, planners, programme implementers,
researchers and activists alike.
How do urban and the rural segments compare with regard to access to electricity for
lighting? For that we turn to the third set of maps (see ‘The rural-urban divide’ p10). The
map on the left shows that a very large part of the urban landscape has more than 80 per
cent households that access electricity as a major source of lighting. But the map on the
right reveals the rural reality where a far smaller set of districts can boast of 75 per cent or
more households having such an access.
It would appear logical that solar energy should have made a much stronger headway in
the region where kerosene has been used for lighting. But that does not seem to have
happened (see ‘Solar has not stepped in to replace kerosene’ p10). One can no doubt see
The energy divide
Chronic power deprivation in some districts raises serious policy issues1

9
a sizeable cluster of districts in rural area where solar energy is used for lighting. But this
cluster shows up only when we lower the cut-off level to as low as 0.2 per cent households.
However, census data also shows that the number of urban districts where more than
0.2 per cent households were using solar energy for lighting has reduced considerably
between 2001 and 2011. Solar energy has not been able to replace kerosene as the major
source of lighting whether in rural or in urban areas. It needs to be analysed whether it is
a cost issue, an access issue or a governance issue.
There is some hope. The 2011 Census data also shows that in 46 districts in the country
more than two per cent households use solar energy as a source of electricity.
Districts that lack electricity make up with kerosene (2011)
Scenario improved since 2001, but not enough
>80
< 47
>= 47 & <= 80
>67
<= 25
>25 & <= 67
Electricity use
2011 2001
Households where electricity hasn't reached use
kerosene. Solar has not made much headway
What lights India
>71
<= 55
> 55 & <= 71
>55
<= 30
> 30 & <= 55
Source of lighting:
Electricity
Source of lighting:
Kerosene
trict lack elects thatricDis
e eleHouseholds wher
. Solar has nooseneerk
stt lighWha
osene (2011)ere up with kcity mak
eached uset r'y hasntricitc
yt made much headwao
India
e 2ed sincvoenario imprcS t enough, but no2001

10
The rural-urban divide
Urban: having more than
80% households that access
electricity (2011)
Rural: having more than
75% households that
access electricity (2011)
The rural-urban divide
han
ecac
an
Solar has not stepped in to replace kerosene
Source of lighting: Electricity
2011 2001
Source: Census reports of 2001 and 2011
oepped in ttt solar has noS oseneere keplaco r
trlec
1f 200ts oeporensus re: CcSour 111 and 20

11
T
he census data of 2001 and 2011 sheds light on the use of different sources of fuel
and lighting. It lists firewood, crop residue, cow dung cake, kerosene, LPG and coal—
lignite, charcoal biogas—as fuel sources. The census data also has a category “no
cooking”. The tables on p11,12,13 provide state-wise data from 2011 Census in terms of
percentage of households using these fuel sources.
How India cooks its food
The disparity between India and Bharat is glaring when one looks at the fuel used for cooking
Households using different fuels as primary source for cooking (in %)
A sizeable portion of India continues to use firewood as fuel for cooking
States TOTAL (Rural + Urban)
Firewood Crop Cow Coal/ Kerosene LPG Electricity Biogas Any ‘No
residue dung lignite/ other cooking’
cake charcoal
Jammu & Kashmir 58.9 2.5 4.2 0 1.3 31.6 0.3 0.8 0.2 0.2
Himachal Pradesh 57.5 1.1 0.2 0 2.1 38.6 0.1 0.1 0 0.3
Punjab 13.3 6.5 20.4 0.2 3.2 54.5 0 1.4 0.1 0.3
Chandigarh 4.6 0.3 0.2 0.1 21.9 71.6 0 0.1 0.1 1.1
Uttarakhand 48.7 1.3 3.2 0.1 1.8 44.2 0 0.5 0 0.3
Haryana 26 14.1 14.2 0.1 1 44 0 0.2 0.1 0.2
NCT of Delhi 3.4 0.3 0.6 0.1 5.3 89.9 0 0.1 0.1 0.3
Rajasthan 61.8 11 3 0.1 0.9 22.8 0 0.1 0.1 0.2
Uttar Pradesh 47.7 8.7 23.1 0.3 0.7 18.9 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.2
Bihar 34.7 32.5 21.7 1 0.3 8.1 0.1 0.2 1.2 0.2
Sikkim 52.5 0.6 0.2 0.1 4.4 41.3 0.3 0.1 0 0.6
Arunachal Pradesh 68.7 0.7 0.1 0 0.7 29.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3
Nagaland 77.9 0.8 0.1 0 0.6 20 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2
Manipur 65.7 1.1 0.2 2.1 0.2 29.7 0.1 0.2 0.6 0.1
Mizoram 44.5 0.3 0.1 0.4 1.8 52.5 0.2 0.1 0 0.1
Tripura 80.5 0.8 0.1 0.1 0.6 17.6 0 0.1 0.1 0.1
Meghalaya 79 0.9 0.3 2.3 3.7 11.8 1.6 0.2 0.1 0.2
Assam 72.1 6.4 0.9 0.1 0.6 19 0 0.1 0.4 0.4
West Bengal 33.1 25.6 10 7.9 2.1 18 0.1 0.3 2.7 0.3
Jharkhand 57.5 4 7.2 18.1 0.2 11.7 0.3 0.1 0.6 0.1
Odisha 65 10.2 9.4 1.6 1.1 9.8 0.4 0.2 2 0.3
Chhattisgarh 80.8 0.9 3.7 2.3 0.5 11.2 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.2
Madhya Pradesh 66.4 5.6 7.7 0.2 1.3 18.2 0 0.3 0 0.2
Gujarat 44 5.7 2.6 0.5 7.6 38.3 0 0.9 0.1 0.4
Daman & Diu 10.8 1.4 0.2 0.2 30.8 53 0.1 0.9 0.1 2.4
Dadra & Nagar Haveli 40.4 0.4 0.2 0.1 17.8 39.8 0 0.4 0 0.8
Maharashtra 42.6 4.5 1.2 0.2 6.5 43.4 0.1 0.7 0.1 0.8
Andhra Pradesh 56.8 1.4 0.6 0.3 3.8 35.8 0.1 0.7 0.1 0.3
Karnataka 57.5 2.9 0.2 0.1 5.4 32.5 0.1 0.9 0.1 0.3
Goa 20.7 0.9 0.2 0.1 4.1 72.7 0.1 0.4 0.1 0.7
Lakshadweep 54.8 10.7 0.1 0.1 13.7 16.6 1.2 0.2 0 2.5
Kerala 61.9 0.8 0.1 0.1 0.4 35.8 0 0.6 0 0.3
Tamil Nadu 43.5 0.6 0.2 0.1 6.9 47.9 0.1 0.3 0 0.4
Puducherry 18 0.3 0.1 0 10.3 70.5 0.1 0.1 0 0.6
Andaman & Nicobar Islands 33.8 0.4 0 0 19.8 44.5 0 0 0.1 1.4
Source: Census 2011
2

12
Rural households using different fuels as primary source for cooking (in %)
Rural India accounts for the excessive use of firewood for cooking
States Rural
cake charcoal
Jammu & Kashmir 73.8 3 5.2 0 0.5 16.3 0.1 0.6 0.2 0.2
Himachal Pradesh 64 1.1 0.2 0 1.6 32.7 0.1 0.1 0 0.2
Punjab 17 9.8 30.5 0.1 1.5 38.9 0 1.8 0.1 0.3
Chandigarh 11.1 0.1 1 0 18 67.1 0 0.1 0.1 2.5
Uttarakhand 63.3 1.5 3.9 0.1 0.9 29.4 0 0.6 0 0.2
Haryana 34.2 21 19.6 0.1 0.4 24.1 0 0.3 0 0.2
NCT of Delhi 11.3 1.6 3.7 0.1 7.7 75.2 0.1 0.1 0 0.2
Rajasthan 74.4 13.9 3.4 0.1 0.2 7.7 0 0.1 0.1 0.2
Uttar Pradesh 54.4 10.5 27.9 0.1 0.2 6.4 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2
Bihar 35.5 35.4 23.3 0.4 0.2 3.4 0.1 0.2 1.3 0.2
Sikkim 70.8 0.7 0.2 0 2.9 24.3 0.3 0.1 0 0.6
Arunachal Pradesh 85.3 0.8 0.1 0 0.5 13 0.1 0.1 0 0.2
Nagaland 91.8 0.8 0.1 0 0.1 6.7 0.1 0.1 0 0.2
Manipur 80.2 1.3 0.2 1.3 0.1 16 0.1 0.2 0.5 0.1
Mizoram 80.8 0.3 0.1 0.3 0.3 17.9 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
Tripura 93.3 0.8 0.1 0.1 0.2 5.3 0 0 0.1 0.1
Meghalaya 93.7 1 0.3 0.7 0.7 2.6 0.8 0.1 0.1 0.2
Assam 80.6 7.4 1 0.1 0.2 9.9 0 0.1 0.4 0.4
West Bengal 39.2 35.7 13.6 3.3 0.2 4 0.1 0.2 3.6 0.2
Jharkhand 71.6 4.8 8.8 11.8 0.1 1.9 0.1 0.1 0.6 0.1
Odisha 70.6 11.7 10.7 0.8 0.3 3.1 0.2 0.1 2.3 0.2
Chhattisgarh 92.1 0.9 4.4 0.3 0.1 1.6 0 0.2 0 0.2
Madhya Pradesh 78.6 7.1 9.9 0 0.2 3.5 0 0.4 0 0.1
Gujarat 67.9 9.7 3.6 0.1 3.1 14.3 0 1 0 0.3
Daman & Diu 37.3 6.3 0.2 0 10.5 42.3 0.1 0.9 0.6 1.9
Dadra & Nagar Haveli 72.4 0.5 0.3 0 14.4 11.8 0 0.1 0 0.4
Maharashtra 68.9 7.7 2 0.1 1.7 17.9 0.1 1 0.1 0.4
Andhra Pradesh 74.9 1.6 0.7 0.2 0.8 20.6 0 0.6 0.1 0.3
Karnataka 82 4.3 0.3 0.1 1.1 11 0.1 1 0.1 0.2
Goa 35.4 1.2 0.2 0.1 2.6 59.5 0.1 0.3 0 0.6
Lakshadweep 36.5 44.6 0.1 0.1 12.2 2.9 1.7 0.1 0 1.9
Kerala 73 0.9 0.1 0.1 0.2 24.7 0 0.7 0 0.3
Tamil Nadu 66.8 0.8 0.3 0.1 2.5 28.6 0 0.3 0 0.4
Puducherry 36 0.4 0.2 0.1 9.8 52.9 0.1 0.1 0 0.6
Andaman & Nicobar Islands 51 0.5 0.1 0 15.6 31.5 0 0 0.1 1.2
Source: Census 2011

13
Urban households using different fuels as primary source for cooking (in %)
The dependency on firewood reduces sharply in urban areas
States Urban
cake charcoal
Jammu & Kashmir 15.7 1.1 1.3 0 3.5 75.7 1 1.3 0 0.3
Himachal Pradesh 6.8 0.7 0.1 0 5.9 85.1 0.5 0.1 0 0.7
Punjab 7.5 1.3 4.5 0.3 5.9 79.3 0 0.8 0 0.3
Chandigarh 4.5 0.3 0.2 0.1 22 71.8 0 0.1 0.1 1
Uttarakhand 14 0.7 1.4 0.1 3.8 79.4 0 0.1 0.1 0.4
Haryana 12.2 2.4 5 0.2 2 77.6 0 0.2 0.1 0.3
NCT of Delhi 3.2 0.2 0.5 0.1 5.2 90.3 0 0.1 0.1 0.3
Rajasthan 23.3 1.9 1.6 0.3 2.9 69.4 0 0.2 0.1 0.4
Uttar Pradesh 24.8 2.5 6.9 0.7 2.4 61.7 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.3
Bihar 28.6 7.7 8 5.7 1 47.4 0.1 0.4 0.7 0.3
Sikkim 5.3 0.2 0.1 0.2 8.3 85.1 0.1 0.1 0 0.6
Arunachal Pradesh 19.2 0.5 0.1 0 1.5 77.5 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.6
Nagaland 43.6 0.7 0.1 0.1 1.9 52.7 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.4
Manipur 37.3 0.9 0.2 3.6 0.3 56.4 0.1 0.3 0.9 0.1
Mizoram 11.7 0.2 0 0.6 3.1 83.8 0.2 0.1 0 0.2
Tripura 47.3 0.6 0.2 0.1 1.8 49.7 0 0.1 0.1 0.1
Meghalaya 25.8 0.4 0.1 8.1 14.8 45.6 4.5 0.4 0.1 0.2
Assam 26.2 1.2 0.2 0.3 3.2 68 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.5
West Bengal 19.9 3.6 2.3 17.8 6.3 48.2 0.1 0.4 0.9 0.5
Jharkhand 13.5 1.5 2 38.1 0.7 42.1 1.2 0.2 0.6 0.3
Odisha 34.8 2.2 2.6 5.6 5.6 46.1 1.7 0.2 0.5 0.5
Chhattisgarh 40.8 0.9 1.3 9.2 1.8 45 0.3 0.1 0.3 0.3
Madhya Pradesh 31 1.2 1.3 0.7 4.5 60.5 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.4
Gujarat 14.2 0.7 1.3 0.8 13.2 68.3 0 0.8 0.1 0.5
Daman & Diu 3.7 0.2 0.2 0.2 36.3 55.9 0.1 1 0 2.5
Dadra & Nagar Haveli 10.3 0.2 0.1 0.2 21.1 66.2 0 0.6 0 1.3
Maharashtra 10.8 0.7 0.3 0.3 12.3 74.1 0 0.2 0.1 1.1
Andhra Pradesh 18.8 0.9 0.2 0.6 10.2 67.7 0.1 0.9 0.2 0.4
Karnataka 21.2 0.9 0.1 0.1 11.7 64.3 0.2 0.8 0.1 0.5
Goa 11.5 0.7 0.2 0.1 5.1 81.1 0 0.4 0.1 0.8
Lakshadweep 60.5 0.3 0.1 0 14.2 20.9 1.1 0.2 0 2.7
Kerala 49.4 0.7 0.1 0.1 0.5 48.4 0 0.6 0 0.3
Tamil Nadu 18.4 0.4 0.1 0.1 11.5 68.7 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.4
Puducherry 9.7 0.2 0.1 0 10.6 78.7 0.1 0.1 0 0.6
Andaman & Nicobar Islands 4.4 0.2 0 0 26.8 66.9 0 0 0 1.6
Source: Census 2011

14
The census data is presented in terms of percentage of households that use the fuel
concerned as primary source for cooking. It does not preclude the possibility of use of
other “secondary” source, but that is beyond the scope of the present analysis. One can
clearly see two distinct groups: one, comprising firewood, crop residues and cow dung
cake, and the other “clean fuel” group, primarily LPG and, very marginally, biogas and
electricity. Between themselves these cover most households, except Jharkhand and West
Bengal where coal is used by a significant number of households, and certain island states,
NCT of Delhi, Chandigarh and, surprisingly, Tamil Nadu and Puducherry, where kerosene
is used for cooking. This grouping of fuels as “clean” and “not-so-clean” is important from
the view point of indoor pollution to which women and children are exposed—a point
which we visit later.
Firewood still the mainstay?
Firewood remains a major source of fuel even in 2011. High dependency on firewood was
a problem in 2001 as (see ‘% of hh using firewood’). The position has not changed in 2011
except that the cut off percentage has come down from 64 per cent to 54 per cent. In the
urban areas, such a clustering of states can be seen at the cut off of 27 per cent for 2001 and
18.6 per cent for 2011 (see ‘% of households using firewood in urban sector’ p15).
The district-level maps reveal a much sharper figure (see ‘District-wise use of firewood’).
On breaking them into rural and urban, we see that the use of firewood is quite intense in
rural areas and the intensity of use has hardly changed between 2001 and 2011 (see
‘District-wise use of firewood in rural sector’ p16). Similarly, in urban areas, the firewood-
using areas have remained nearly the same even though there is a drop in the cut off
percentage—districts where more than 25 per cent households were using firewood for
cooking in 2001 to a cut off per cent of 20 per cent in 2011 (see ‘District-wise use of
firewood in urban sector’). We see that the levels of deprivation reduce faster in urban
areas but are more enduring in the rural areas.
Complementing firewood, crop residue and cow-dung show a compact belt from Punjab to
West Bengal where the use of firewood is comparatively less.

17
We saw earlier, in passing, that the reduction in the usage of kerosene as a fuel for cooking
represents a success story, though not adequately publicised. However, as a source for
lighting, it represents a story of failure; first in terms of electricity not reaching everywhere
and, second, in terms of solar home lighting not being able to capture the space occupied
by kerosene. It is important to highlight this point since petroleum products claim the third
biggest subsidy in our economy (about `65,000 crore per annum), next only to food (`1.2
lakh crore) and fertiliser (`1 lakh crore). Furthermore, the government gives a subsidy of `33
for every litre of kerosene used. Assuming a consumption of about 30-35 litres of kerosene
per annum per household for lighting purposes, there is a subsidy out flow of `1,000-1,200
per household per annum. Contrast this with the one-time subsidy of `1,000 or less that
will be needed for the solar home lighting system. If we invest `1,000 crore in one year, we
will be saving a like amount every year, year after year. The reduced carbon footprint is an
additional bonus.
The “subsidy” for solar home lights is, therefore, not a charity but an investment. This
investment must come from the Ministry of Petroleum and not from the Ministry of
Renewable Energy, which has an annual budget of just `1,600 crore as against the subsidy
budget of about `65,000 crore on petroleum products.
The scale of this problem will be clear if we note that as per the 2011 Census there are
more than 75 million households which depend on kerosene as a source for lighting. Most
of the districts, however, show that solar energy as a source covers hardly 0.3 to 0.5 per cent
of the households. There is surely a long way to go.
The reduction in the number of households using kerosene as a source of fuel for cooking
has been significant. The number of districts where 6 per cent or more urban households
use kerosene as fuel for cooking has drastically reduced between 2001 and 2011 (‘A positive
sign’). In rural areas, too, the number of districts where less than 1 per cent households use
kerosene as a fuel for cooking has increased substantially although such low usages may
also be a result of lower purchasing power.
Kerosene: the story of success and failure
A positive sign
Districts with urban households using kerosene has drastically reduced
urban households use kerosene as
source of fuel for cooking
Regions where more than 6% urban
of fuel for cooking in 2011

18
T
he picture changes when we disaggregate the data for each state below the district
level. Certain counter-intuitive trends emerge along with action points. In some
cases the kerosene-use pockets come into sharper focus. The census data also
provides the number of households using different sources of fuel in absolute terms. It is
useful to look at such data as well. It is quite plausible to expect the intra-state variations
to be sharper and also to expect quite different patterns of consumption of kerosene for
lighting and as a fuel for cooking.
Delhi
Quite predictably, the National Capital Territory (NCT) has seen a drastic reduction in the
use of kerosene as a source of lighting between 2001 and 2011, which is how it should be
(see ‘Delhi households that use kerosene for lighting’). Intriguingly however, the
cantonment sub-district continues to show a rather high percentage (3.8 per cent) of
households using kerosene for lighting—a level comparable to the 2001 level. This needs
some scrutiny—are these households still without electricity or some continuing
“entitlement” is resulting in siphoning of kerosene?
But it is in the use of kerosene for cooking where the real concern emerges. As per Census
2011, about 175,000 households out of a total of about 3.3 million households still depend
on kerosene for cooking with another 112,000 using firewood. While the reduction in use
of kerosene from 2001 levels, when most sub-districts reported 12 per cent or more
households using it, is impressive (see ‘Delhi households that use kerosene as fuel for
cooking’ p19), the use of kerosene by more than 9 per cent households in Chanakyapuri,
Delhi Cantonment and Model Town sub-districts is a matter of concern. Delhi’s cooking
fuel gives sub district-wise details of number of households using different fuel sources. It
is intriguing to see a large number of households using kerosene and firewood even in
places such as Defence Colony and Hauz Khas. An equally intriguing figure is of 91 biogas
plants in Vasant Vihar and 573 biogas plants in Defence Colony. It will be interesting to
State matters
An analysis of the states that are faring well and the ones that are not in sourcing energy
Capital’s fuel mix for cooking
Households using firewood still high
Delhi households that use kerosene for lighting
Capital’s dependency on kerosene has reduced between 2001 and 2011
3

19
Delhi households that use kerosene as fuel for cooking
Kerosene is being used in Chanakyapuri, Model Town
Delhi’s cooking fuel
A large number of households are still using kerosene and firewood in Defence Colony and Hauz Khas
Area Name Total Type of Fuel used for Cooking
Number of Firewood Crop Cow- Coal, Kerosene LPG/PNG Electricity Biogas Any other No
households residue dung Lignite, cooking
cake Charcoal
STATE - NCT OF DELHI 33,40,538 1,12,291 9,094 19,487 4,476 1,75,443 30,03,996 1,335 3,017 1,866 9,533
North West 7,30,034 35,080 2,628 5,246 1,040 57,234 6,25,662 350 532 591 1,671
Narela 1,60,861 14,613 1,222 2,466 352 14,096 1,27,388 21 99 252 352
Saraswati Vihar 4,48,310 15,149 1,218 1,891 558 28,275 3,99,291 284 382 321 941
Model Town 1,20,863 5,318 188 889 130 14,863 98,983 45 51 18 378
North 1,75,890 3,827 748 866 93 8,063 1,61,067 47 147 46 986
Civil Lines 1,37,681 3,222 656 679 74 5,797 1,26,389 31 135 33 665
Sadar Bazar 24,232 445 84 186 11 1,700 21,514 11 5 7 269
Kotwali 13,977 160 8 1 8 566 13,164 5 7 6 52
North East 3,95,060 8,212 803 4,202 581 22,667 3,56,769 67 407 409 943
Seelam Pur 2,36,475 4,278 506 2,874 262 10,161 2,17,128 29 356 353 528
Shahdara 56,649 670 90 163 98 3,628 51,801 21 8 17 153
Seema Puri 1,01,936 3,264 207 1,165 221 8,878 87,840 17 43 39 262
East 3,54,385 7,877 562 1,435 119 15,738 3,27,253 74 232 89 1,006
Gandhi Nagar 81,164 2,330 218 106 19 3,200 74,994 38 14 30 215
Vivek Vihar 48,911 839 45 107 25 3,925 43,857 2 18 5 88
Preet Vihar 2,24,310 4,708 299 1,222 75 8,613 2,08,402 34 200 54 703
New Delhi 30,385 1,226 54 27 18 2,042 26,681 112 12 10 203
Connaught Place 6,331 112 17 12 7 315 5,828 11 3 1 25
Chanakya Puri 13,466 879 21 13 - 1,261 11,029 96 7 8 152
Parliament Street 10,588 235 16 2 11 466 9,824 5 2 1 26
Central 1,14,587 2,704 175 170 97 8,753 1,01,826 187 47 77 551
Darya Ganj 50,254 1,610 56 56 71 5,910 42,134 146 11 51 209
Pahar Ganj 35,246 926 84 112 23 2,418 31,388 37 26 16 216
Karol Bagh 29,087 168 35 2 3 425 28,304 4 10 10 126
West 5,23,703 16,239 889 1,616 1,272 25,770 4,75,985 203 385 245 1,099
Patel Nagar 2,63,957 7,328 314 700 545 10,070 2,43,922 83 270 192 533
Rajouri Garden 1,01,148 2,334 97 44 97 8,867 89,350 27 38 18 276
Punjabi Bagh 1,58,598 6,577 478 872 630 6,833 1,42,713 93 77 35 290
South West 4,62,772 17,881 1,882 3,447 296 13,714 4,23,855 139 218 220 1,120
Najafgarh 2,70,344 8,910 1,393 2,827 119 2,429 2,53,873 80 112 169 432
Delhi Cantonment 49,693 2,404 119 48 38 6,161 40,668 22 15 20 198
Vasant Vihar 1,42,735 6,567 370 572 139 5,124 1,29,314 37 91 31 490
South 5,53,722 19,245 1,353 2,478 960 21,462 5,04,898 156 1,037 179 1,954
Hauz Khas 2,46,911 9,478 547 1,443 138 4,408 2,29,864 27 234 79 693
Defence Colony 1,32,210 3,092 114 296 115 6,573 1,20,804 53 573 45 545
Kalkaji 1,74,601 6,675 692 739 707 10,481 1,54,230 76 230 55 716
Source: Census 2011

20
survey the working of biogas plants in Delhi.
If there really are 112,291 households using firewood, NCT is an ideal place for the Ministry
of Renewable Energy to propagate modern and efficient cook-stoves that use firewood but
provide cleaner blue flame. These users will not certainly be the illiterate and rural poor
who are unable to pay for modern wood burning cook-stoves. There are adequate numbers
of forced draft blue flame wood-burning stoves that can be marketed as well.
‘Capital’s fuel mix’ on p18 gives the break-up of use of various fuel sources in the NCT as
per 2011 census. While LPG does show an impressive coverage of 90 per cent, the fact that
nearly 300,000 households use kerosene and firewood, is disconcerting. Three action
points are clear: a cross check of the 2001 census figures, replacement of kerosene with LPG
and introduction of wood-stoves with blue flame.
Coming back to the kerosene story, however, there is a clear need to follow up the census
data with a more detailed survey to find out how Delhi can be made kerosene free.
Prosperous north India
From the energy consumption point of view, northern states can be grouped into two
separate types. The first, comprising of Haryana, Punjab and the three hill states of
Uttarakhand, Himachal Pradesh and Jammu and Kashmir (J&K), and the second,
comprising Uttar Pradesh (UP), Bihar, Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh and the new states
of Chhattisgarh and Jharkhand.
We first take up the case of Haryana, Punjab and the three hill states of Himachal Pradesh,
Uttarakhand and J&K.
In Haryana, the use of kerosene has declined considerably between 2001 and 2011 with less
than 4 per cent households dependent on kerosene for their lighting needs in a majority of
sub-districts.
The sub-district dip in use of kerosene as a source of lighting in urban Haryana can be seen
in ‘Kerosene as source of light in urban Haryana’ on p21. Similarly, in rural Haryana, too,
(see ‘Kerosene as source of light in rural Haryana’ p21) sub-districts where more than
18 per cent households used kerosene for lighting (shown in red) has declined considerably
Haryana’s rural fuel mix
Firewood is a primary source for cooking in rural Haryana households

21
while sub districts where less than 9 per cent households depend on kerosene (green) has
gone up substantially, covering most of the north-eastern Haryana.
Even in cooking, the use of kerosene as a fuel is low in Haryana, both in its rural and urban
areas. Most sub-districts in rural areas show less than 2 per cent households using kerosene
as fuel for cooking purposes while in urban Haryana most sub-districts show less than
4 per cent households dependent on kerosene for such use.
Kerosene as source of light in urban Haryana
There has been a positive reduction in urban Haryana’s dependency on kerosene
Kerosene as source of light in rural Haryana
Sub-districts where more than 18 per cent households use kerosene for lighting has declined

22
The low use of kerosene does not, however, mean a switch over to LPG. Even in urban
Haryana, there is considerable dependence on firewood, crop-residues and cow-dung cake
even though 78 per cent households use LPG (see ‘Rural Haryana’s fuel mix for cooking’).
The rural fuel consumption pattern stands out in contrast (see ‘Fuel sources for cooking in
rural Haryana). Only 24 per cent households use LPG, not very different proportion from
those using cow-dung cake (20 per cent) and crop residue (21 per cent) and certainly much
less than firewood that accounts for 34 per cent households. Just as solar home lighting has
been unable to capture the space occupied by kerosene, biogas plants have been unable to
capture the space occupied by cow dung for direct burning, a mode where we lose on the
fertiliser part completely and lose out of the clean fuel part due to direct burning.
Use of cow-dung cake is predominant in the north-eastern part of Haryana with very little
change between 2001 and 2011 (see ‘Cow dung cake as fuel used for cooking in rural
Haryana’ p23).
Rural Haryana’s fuel mix for cooking
Only 24 per cent households use LPG
Fuel sources for cooking in urban Haryana
There is considerable dependence on firewood and crop residue

23
Rural Punjab’s fuel mix for cooking
Use of LPG is higher than that of Haryana
Urban Punjab’s fuel mix for cooking
Use of LPG in rural Punjab is higher than in Haryana
Cow dung cake as fuel used for cooking in rural Haryana
Use of cow-dung cake is predominant in the north-eastern part of Haryana

24
We will come to the detailed state-level analysis of other energy sources for Haryana later.
It will be interesting to contrast the fuel-mix pattern of Punjab and Haryana.
While the use of LPG in rural Punjab (see ‘Rural Punjab’s fuel mix for cooking’ p23) is
considerably greater (39 per cent) than that in Haryana (24 per cent), the use of cow-dung
cake surprisingly occupies the second position (30 per cent households) and not firewood
(17 per cent) or crop residue (10 per cent). Urban Punjab, however, shows a fuel
mix distribution pretty much similar to that of urban Haryana (see ‘Urban Punjab’s energy
mix’ p23).
Coming back to the kerosene story, its use for lighting has drastically reduced in Punjab.
In the urban areas, there are hardly any sub-districts where more than 3.5 per cent
households use kerosene, except Dhar Kalan (7.8 per cent), Anandpur Sahib (5.3 per cent)
and, surprisingly, Amritsar (3.9 per cent); in rural Punjab, too, there are no sub-districts
where more than 5 per cent households use kerosene for lighting, except Fazilka, Abohar
and Ajnala. It is worth examining whether these outliers represent any siphoning of
kerosene.
Similarly, in cooking, too, the usage of kerosene as a fuel has substantially come down
with most sub-districts having less than 3 per cent households using it as such. But in
parts of Amritsar, Kapurthala, Ludhiana and Fatehgarh Saheb high usage of kerosene needs
further scrutiny, particularly in Payal (10.5 per cent) and Amloh (20.7 per cent). In rural
Punjab, the use of kerosene is very low as we have seen above with most sub-districts
reporting less than 6 per cent households using it.
In urban areas, the low usage of kerosene can be attributed to increased usage of LPG. Sub-
districts where more than 75 per cent households use LPG has increased significantly
between 2001 and 2011 with hardly three sub-districts where this is below 40 per cent.
However, this is not the case in rural Punjab as can be inferred from ‘LPG as fuel used in
rural Punjab’). The maps show that in a number of sub-districts less than 33 per cent
households use LPG even though areas where more than 33 per cent (yellow) and 50 per
cent (green) households use LPG has increased considerably. Interestingly, the low LPG
region is clustered in the south-western part of the state while the high usage region is
developing in the northern tip.
LPG as fuel used for cooking in rural Punjab
Use of LPG has not increased substantially in rural Punjab

25
Hill states
The three hill states of Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand and J&K seem to have fared well in
their energy mix.
Himachal Pradesh: In Himachal Pradesh, the use of kerosene has reduced considerably,
especially in the rural area between 2001 and 2011 (see ‘Kerosene as source of light in rural
Himachal’), with the area where less than 5 per cent households depend on kerosene for
lighting having expanded rapidly.
Even in the urban areas, except Una and Kasauli, not a single sub-district has more than 5
per cent households dependent on kerosene for lighting. The reason for this is the enviable
track record of electrification. Even in its rural region, 83 per cent or more households use
electricity for lighting with the exception of Spiti where nearly two-thirds households use
electricity. Given this track record, there is, in fact, a strong case for solar home lighting
taking the place of kerosene to make the state kerosene-free.
Such a case becomes even stronger once we note that the use of kerosene for cooking is also
considerably low in Himachal Pradesh, both in rural and urban areas, with most places
reporting dependence on kerosene by less than 10 per cent of the households.
While in the rural areas, it is only in Kalpa in Kinnaur district where more than 10 per
cent households use kerosene as fuel for cooking, in urban areas there are four such urban
sub-districts: Naina Devi (14.6 per cent) in Bilaspur, Baddi (18 per cent), Kasauli (12.6 per
cent) in Solan and Seoni (12.6 per cent) in Simla. It is worth examining whether these
outliers represent any siphoning of kerosene.
Interestingly, in Spiti, hardly one per cent households use kerosene as fuel for cooking and
it may be worthwhile to make Spiti kerosene-free through solar home lighting programme.
It will be instructive to see the fuel mix for cooking, both in the rural and the urban
Himachal (see ‘Rural and urban Himachal’s energy mix for cooking’). In rural regions, LPG
(33 per cent) and firewood (64 per cent) cover most of the use with other sources being
insignificant players. This makes a strong case for making improved cook stoves popular
in this region.
Kerosene as source of light in rural Himachal Pradesh
Use of kerosene has substantially dropped between 2001 and 2011

26
But it is the urban distribution which is noteworthy, with 85 per cent households using LPG
as the main source of cooking fuel followed by firewood (7 per cent) and kerosene
(6 per cent).
Uttarakhand: Coming back to the story of kerosene, it is once again seen that rural
Uttarakhand has done well in reducing its dependence on kerosene for lighting (see
‘Kerosene as source of light in Uttarakhand’ p27). The percentage of households dependent
on kerosene has reduced from a range of 14-72 per cent in 2001 to a range of 2.8–40.6 per
Rural Himachal’s energy mix for cooking
The heavy dependency on firewood makes it an ideal place to popularise cook stoves
Urban Himachal’s energy mix for cooking
Firewood is the second most popular source

27
cent in 2011. But the state does lag behind Himachal Pradesh significantly, given the large
number of sub-district units where the dependence continues to be more than 20 per cent
(shown in red).
However, the story in urban Uttarakhand is different. Barring Udham Singh Nagar and
Poornagiri sub-district in Champawat (9 per cent), nowhere else more than 5 per cent
households depend on kerosene for lighting purposes. Here again, solar light has not been
able to claim the space occupied by kerosene.
Uttarakhand has done remarkably well in reducing the use of kerosene as a fuel for cooking
purposes. In urban Uttarakhand in 2011, there is hardly any sub-district where more than
10 per cent households depend on kerosene as fuel while in rural areas such usage is even
less—below three per cent households depend on it. This does not, however, correspond
to high use of LPG.
J&K: Like Uttarakhand, rural J&K has also brought down the dependence on kerosene as
source of lighting between 2001 and 2011. However, there are a number of sub-districts
where more than 25 per cent households are dependent on kerosene for lighting (see
Kerosene as source of light in Uttarakhand
The percentage on households dependent on kerosene has come down substantially
Kerosene as source of light in rural J&K
While the state has brought down its dependency on kerosene, some pockets still remain

28
‘Kerosene as source of light in rural J&K). In urban areas, however,
there is hardly any sub-district where such dependence is above 10
per cent. Solar home lighting definitely has a scope in replacing
kerosene in the state as has indeed been done in a number of sub-
districts successfully. The need is to saturate the solar home lighting
coverage.
In urban J&K also, the dependence on kerosene as fuel for cooking
has declined considerably between 2001 and 2011, with very few
sub-districts where more than 6 per cent households are dependent
on it and none where this dependence exceeds 12 per cent. In rural
areas, too, hardly 2-3 per cent households use kerosene as fuel.
All the three hill states have, thus, fared well in terms of reducing
dependence on kerosene whether for lighting or as a fuel for cooking.
While Punjab has fared well too, the same cannot be said of Haryana
particularly in use of kerosene as fuel for cooking.
The kerosene story in southern states
The four southern states have done very well in terms of providing
electricity to their people. The states also show a good penetration of
LPG. Interestingly, between themselves, LPG and firewood account for
most cooking energy, use of other sources of biomass is insignificant.
The strides made between 2001 and 2011 in terms of providing
electricity have been striking.
Kerala: Kerala’s track record in providing electricity to its rural areas
can be inferred from the reduction in the number of households
dependent on kerosene for this purpose. ‘Kerosene use in Kerala for
lighting’ shows a sharp decline in the number of sub-districts where
more than 15 per cent households depend on kerosene for lighting
purpose (shown in red). More important is the rise in a number of
sub-districts (shown in green) where less than 6 per cent households
have such dependence. In urban Kerala, most sub-districts have less
than 5 per cent households using kerosene for lighting.
When it comes to use of kerosene as a fuel for cooking, Kerala has
done extremely well with no sub-district showing more than 0.5 per
cent households using kerosene as fuel, except in Kochi where it is
0.6 per cent. In urban Kerala, too, no sub-district in 2011 has more
that 1 per cent population using kerosene as fuel for cooking, except
Palakkad (1.3 per cent) and Kochi (2.8 per cent).
It is also interesting to look at the sources of fuel used for cooking in
Kerala. Unlike in northern states, LPG and firewood account for most
energy consumption, both in urban and rural areas. All other sources
are insignificant. However, the use of LPG is relatively low in rural
areas (25 per cent) and, surprisingly, urban areas as well (48 per cent)
as seen in ‘Rural and urban Kerala’s energy mix for cooking’ on p28.
Equally surprisingly, 49 per cent urban households in Kerala use
firewood as a source of fuel for cooking purposes.
Tamil Nadu: Kerala’s neighbour, Tamil Nadu, too has done well in
providing its rural and urban households access to electricity.
Between 2001 and 2011 (see ‘Kerosene used for lighting in urban
Kerosene use in Kerala for lighting
Most sub-districts have reduced using kerosene
Rural Kerala’s energy mix for cooking
The state heavily depends on firewood
Urban Kerala’s energy mix for cooking
Almost 50 per cent divide between LPG and
firewood usage

29
Tamil Nadu’), the percentage of urban households depending on kerosene has reduced
significantly as can be seen in the increase in the region (shown in green) where less than
6 per cent households depend on kerosene for lighting and a very sharp reduction in the
number of sub-districts where more than 13 per cent households show such dependence.
Yet there is a significant region where more than 6 per cent households still use kerosene
for lighting. In rural Tamil Nadu, too, the area (shown in green) where less than 10 per cent
households use kerosene for lighting has increased significantly between 2001 and 2011
(see ‘Kerosene used for lighting in rural Tamil Nadu). But, there are compact patches where
this percentage ranges between 10-20 per cent and these may need specific focus. The
pattern of fuel energy source for cooking purposes in rural Tamil Nadu (see ‘Rural TN’s
energy mix for cooking’) is quite similar to that in rural Kerala, with LPG accounting for 67
per cent households, and firewood, 29 per cent. However, unlike Kerala, the use of kerosene
is higher, with 3 per cent or nearly 243,000 households using it.
But it is in urban Tamil Nadu (see ‘Urban TN’s energy mix for cooking’) where the
dependence on kerosene as a source of fuel for cooking is high with 12 per cent or nearly
a million households using it. Of course, the use of LPG is quite high at 69 per cent and
firewood accounts for about 19 per cent households only. It must be stated that the usage
of kerosene has significantly reduced between 2001 and 2011 in urban Tamil Nadu (see
Kerosene used for lighting in urban Tamil Nadu
The dependency has come down
Kerosene used for lighting in rural Tamil Nadu
Compact patches with high dependency on kerosene remain
Rural TN’s energy mix for cooking
The mix is similar to that of Kerala’s
Urban TN’s energy mix for cooking
Still high on firewood

30
‘Kerosene used as fuel for cooking in urban Tamil Nadu’).
Karnataka: Urban Karnataka has also been able to reduce dependence on kerosene for
lighting considerably. Compared to 2001, there are very few sub-districts (see ‘Kerosene
used for lighting in urban Karnataka’) where more than 12 per cent households show such
dependence on kerosene (shown in red). But there is an interesting north-south divide,
with most of the southern half showing less than 6 per cent households depending on
kerosene for lighting while most of the northern half shows this dependence ranging
between 6 and 12 per cent.
Kerosene used as fuel for cooking in urban Tamil Nadu
The state’s urban areas have reduced their dependency on kerosene
Kerosene used for lighting in urban Karnataka
Compared to 2001, the dependency on kerosene has come down in 2011

31
Rural Karnataka shows an interesting pattern. While the area where more than 20 per cent
households depend on kerosene for lighting has come down sharply between 2001 and
2011, a stubborn west-east strip in the northern fringe seems to hold out. Furthermore,
while the dependence on kerosene has gone below 6 per cent households in certain
compact patches, more that 10 per cent households continue to have such dependence in
a large part of the state.
When it comes to fuel sources for cooking (see ‘Urban Karnataka’s energy mix for cooking’
p31), urban Karnataka shows large usage of kerosene at about 12 per cent or 620,000
households. Firewood accounts for 21 per cent households and LPG covers about 64 per
cent households. The high kerosene usage is mainly confined to a compact southern cluster
(see ‘kerosene used for lighting in urban Karnataka’) where more than 15 per cent
Kerosene used for lighting in rural Karnataka
A stubborn west-east strip in the northern fringe seems to have high dependency
Urban Karnataka’s energy mix for cooking
Dependency on firewood and kerosene remains high

32
households (shown in red) and 6-15 per cent households (shown in yellow) use it as fuel
for cooking.
In rural Karnataka the usage of firewood has been rather high (82 per cent) and LPG
penetration low (11 per cent). The usage of kerosene has traditionally been low (about 1 per
cent), less than that of crop residue (4 per cent). However, around Bengaluru rural, about
10 per cent households use kerosene.
This leaves us with Andhra Pradesh (undivided). While it may not have done as well as
its other three southern neighbours, it has brought down the usage of kerosene for lighting
considerably (see ‘Kerosene as source of light in rural Andhra Pradesh’ p32). Rural Andhra
has seen considerable reduction in areas where more than 33 per cent households depend
on kerosene (shown in red) and increase in the area where this dependence is below 10 per
Kerosene used for lighting in urban Karnataka
High kerosene usage is restricted to a compact southern cluster
Kerosene as source of light in rural Andhra Pradesh
A considerable reduction in areas where more than 33 per cent households depend on kerosene

33
cent (shown in green). But the 10-33 per cent patch is large enough for concern and for
thinking of solar home lighting as an alternative. Urban Andhra has done remarkably well
by bringing such dependence down to below 5 per cent in most urban areas.
When it comes to sources of fuel for cooking, the picture in Andhra resembles that in Tamil
Nadu. Rural Andhra has significant dependence on firewood (75 per cent) followed by LPG
(21 per cent) (see ‘Rural Andhra’s energy mix for cooking’). Other sources are not
significant. In the urban usage pattern for cooking energy, LPG accounts for 68 per cent of
the fuel mix no doubt, but nearly 700,000 households (10 per cent) still use kerosene as fuel
for cooking and firewood accounting for 19 per cent of the households (see ‘Rural Andhra’s
energy mix for cooking’).
The four southern states, thus, have a good track record in low usage of kerosene for
lighting though the potential of solar home lighting has not been exploited. As regards
reducing usage of kerosene as fuel for cooking, Kerala has an enviable record which its
neighbours need to emulate. In terms of fuel mix, there is very little use of any biomass
other than fuel wood; a pattern considerably different from the northern states.
While the contrast between the better off northern states and the four southern states is
noteworthy, but there is a much sharper contrast awaiting us when we look at the BIMARU
states which emerge as the seat of a far enduring deprivation in terms of the energy poverty
The kerosene story in the BIMARU states
Compared to the southern states, the states of Punjab, Haryana and the three hill states
have fared quite well. But a sharp contrast can be seen in the BIMARU states in terms of the
fuel mix for cooking and the large dependence on kerosene for lighting.
Uttar Pradesh: The first striking feature that emerges is the use of kerosene for lighting
with a substantial area showing 75 per cent or more households dependent on it in rural
UP (see ‘Kerosene as source of light in rural Uttar Pradesh’ p34). Even the region in yellow
band in eastern UP, where the range is taken as 33-75 per cent, most sub-districts fall in the
60-75 per cent band. There are hardly any sub-districts where the dependence is below 20
per cent, the few green patches shown have 20-33 per cent households depending on
kerosene.
Urban UP has not fared very well either. Very few sub-districts have less than 10 per cent
Rural Andhra’s energy mix for cooking
High dependency on firewood
Urban Andhra’s energy mix for cooking
Kerosene and firewood dependency high

34
households using kerosene (green) and in a very large number of sub-districts more than
30 per cent households show this dependence. The change between 2001 and 2011 in
urban areas is very marginal ‘Kerosene as source of light in urban Uttar Pradesh’ p34). This
should be a matter of worry.
Kerosene as source of light in rural Uttar Pradesh
Extremely high dependency on kerosene
Kerosene as source of light in urban Uttar Pradesh (UP)
Alarmingly high dependency in urban sectors
Rural UP’s energy mix for cooking
Urban UP’s energy mix for cooking
Firewood still an important source

35
Consumption of kerosene as fuel for cooking is very low in UP, both in urban and rural areas.
In urban UP, there are a few sub-districts where more than 6 per cent households use kerosene
as fuel for cooking and in most sub-districts this percentage is less than 2 per cent.
Use of kerosene in rural UP is even less. But this is not on account of high LPG consumption.
In most sub-districts of UP, except a compact patch in the western part, less than 10 per cent
households use LPG. Even in urban areas, sub-districts where more than 66 per cent
households use LPG are few and far between.
The pie chart on fuel mix (see ‘Rural and urban UP’s energy mix for cooking’ p34) reveals that
UP still depends on firewood, crop residues and cow dung cakes in a large measure. While
urban UP does show 62 per cent households using LPG, there are 1.8 million households using
firewood and nearly 900,000 households (25 per cent) using cow dung cakes.
Bihar: The state’s position is even more disconcerting. In 2011, most sub-districts show
77 per cent or more rural households dependent on kerosene for lighting except in a thin
strip along the Ganga where this percentage is in the range of 33-77 per cent. Only in two
sub-districts in Patna this is below 33 per cent (see ‘Kerosene as source of lighting in rural
Bihar’ p35)
Urban Bihar has three disadvantages: i) sparse urbanisation ii) a large number of
Kerosene as source of lighting in rural Bihar
Most sub-districts have high dependence on kerosene
Rural Bihar’s energy mix for cooking
Use of firewood and crop residue high
Urban Bihar’s energy mix for cooking
Only Patna has low dependency on firewood

36
sub-districts where more than 33 per cent households still use kerosene for lighting and iii)
most sub districts, except Patna, have more that 10 per cent households depending on
kerosene.
Like UP, consumption of kerosene as fuel for cooking is very low in Bihar both in urban
and rural areas. In urban Bihar, there are few sub-districts where more than 2 per cent
households use kerosene as fuel for cooking.
Use of kerosene in rural Bihar is even less—below 1 per cent households use it. But this is
not on account of high LPG consumption. Most sub-districts of Bihar show less than 6 per
cent rural households using LPG. Even in urban areas, most sub-districts have less than 33
per cent households using LPG.
The pie chart on fuel mix (see ‘Rural and urban Bihar’s energy mix for cooking’ p35) reveals
that Bihar still depends on fire wood, crop residues and cow dung cakes in a larger measure
than UP.
Kerosene as source of light in rural Madhya Pradesh (MP)
The performance is slightly better than that of Bihar and UP
Rural MP’s energy mix for cooking

Madhya Pradesh: The state has done better than Bihar and UP, though in rural areas the
dependence on kerosene for lighting is still high (see ‘Kerosene as source of light in rural
Madhya Pradesh’ p36). There are contiguous patches where this dependence is above 66
per cent (shown in red) which needs attention on a priority basis. Urban MP has a large area
where less than 10 per cent households depend on kerosene and very few sub-districts
where such dependence exceeds 30 per cent.
Consumption of kerosene as fuel for cooking usage is very low in Madhya Pradesh, both
in urban areas and in rural areas. In urban MP, most sub-districts have less than 3 per cent
households using kerosene as fuel for cooking while usage of kerosene in rural MP is even
less—below 1 per cent households use it as fuel for cooking purpose. But this again is not
on account of high LPG consumption though the LPG consumption position here is better
than in UP and Bihar.
The pie chart on fuel mix in rural areas (see ‘Rural MP’s energy mix for cooking’ p36)
reveals a huge dependence on firewood (79 per cent), crop residues and cow dung cakes
and very low penetration of LPG (< 5 per cent) even though urban MP can boast of 61 per
cent households using LPG. But even there, 31 per cent or about 1.2 million households use
firewood and about 170,000 households (5 per cent) use kerosene.
Kerosene as source of lighting in rural Rajasthan
Kerosene dependency reduced in eastern Rajasthan, but western side lagging behind
Rural Rajasthan’s energy mix for cooking
Energy source similar to that of Madhya Pradesh
37

Rajasthan: Like MP, urban Rajasthan too has done far better than UP or Bihar. There is a
large area where less than 10 per cent households depend on kerosene for lighting and
very few sub-districts where such dependence exceeds 20 per cent. The improvement
between 2001 and 2011 in reducing usage of kerosene for lighting purpose has been
considerable. The same cannot be said of rural Rajasthan (see ‘Kerosene as source of
lighting in rural Rajasthan’ p37).
Rural Rajasthan has a large area where more than one-third households are dependent on
kerosene for lighting and very few sub-districts where such dependence is less than 10 per
cent. However, there has been considerable improvement from the situation in 2001 in its
eastern half.
Level of consumption of kerosene as fuel for cooking usage in Rajasthan is quite similar to
that of Madhya Pradesh, both in urban and rural areas. In urban areas, most sub-districts
have less than 3 per cent households using kerosene as fuel for cooking while in rural
Rajasthan this is even less—less than1 per cent households use it. But this again is not on
account of high LPG consumption in urban Rajasthan.
The pie chart on fuel mix in rural areas (see ‘Rural Rajasthan’s energy mix for cooking’
p37) reveals a huge dependence on firewood (74 per cent), followed by crop residues
Kerosene as source of light in urban Chhattisgarh
Remarkable reduction in use of kerosene
Kerosene for lighting in rural Chhattisgarh
Central part still has high dependence
Rural Chhattisgarh’s energy mix for cooking
Extremely high dependency on firewood
Urban Chhattisgarh’s energy mix for cooking
Consumption pattern similar to that of Madhya Pardesh
38

(14 per cent), with very low LPG penetration (about 8 per cent). While urban Rajasthan can
boast of LPG usage by 69 per cent households, there are 23 per cent households (about
700,000) using firewood. The pattern is quite similar to that of MP.
Chhattisgarh: Urban Chhattisgarh has done relatively well with a large area where less
than 10 per cent households depend on kerosene for lighting and very few sub-districts
where such dependence is more than 33 per cent. The improvement in 2011 from the
situation in 2001 is quite clear (see ‘Kerosene as source of light in urban Chhattisgarh’ and
‘Kerosene for lighting in rural Chhattisgarh’ p38).
Rural Chhattisgarh has also done considerably well. There is a vast improvement from the
situation in 2001 in the central part, with a large area where less than 15 per cent
households depend on kerosene for lighting. However, lack of progress in the northern
Chhattisgarh, which is free from the influence of the Left-wing extremism, is difficult to
understand.
Like MP, consumption of kerosene as fuel for cooking usage is very low in Chhattisgarh,
both in urban and rural areas (see ‘ Rural and urban Chhattisgarh’s energy mix for cooking’
p38). Most sub-districts have less than 3 per cent households using kerosene as fuel for
cooking in urban areas. In rural Chhattisgarh, this is even less—below one per cent
households use kerosene. But this again is not on account of high LPG consumption. The
pie chart on fuel mix reveals unusually high dependence on firewood (92 per cent) in the
rural area and a very low LPG usage (2 per cent). Such dependence in urban areas is also
significant, about 41 per cent. A new element is the use of coal by a significant number of
urban households (about 9 per cent).
Kerosene as source of light in rural Jharkhand
Dependency reduced in central sub-districts
Rural Jharkhand’s energy mix for cooking
Dependency on firewood high as in most BIMARU states
Urban Jharkhand’s energy mix for cooking
Dependency on coal and firewood high
39

40
The large dependence on firewood in rural areas, make a strong case for a better LPG
distribution, as well as an intensive programme for improved cook stoves.
Jharkhand: Urban Jharkhand has done considerably well in reducing dependence on
kerosene for lighting between 2001 and 2011, increasing vastly the number of sub-districts
where less than 10 per cent households depend on kerosene for lighting and another set
of sub-districts where this dependence is between 10 and 33 per cent. The improvement
is in sharp contrast with Bihar.
Even rural Jharkhand has brought considerable improvement in its central part compared
to the situation in 2001 (see ‘Kerosene as source of light in rural Jharkhand’ p39). However,
existence of large patches in the eastern and western parts where more than 66 per cent
households depend on kerosene for lighting should be a cause of worry.
The story of consumption of kerosene as fuel for cooking usage in Jharkhand is very similar
to what has been noticed in Chhattisgarh and MP. In urban areas, most sub-districts have
less than 3 per cent households using kerosene as fuel for cooking (see ‘Urban Jharkhand’s
energy mix for cooking’ p39). Usage of kerosene in rural Jharkhand is even less—below
one per cent households use it for cooking (see ‘Urban Jharkhand’s energy mix for cooking’
p39). But this again is not on account of high LPG consumption. Interestingly, coal is used
by a significant number of households in rural (12 per cent) and in urban areas (38 per
cent). The pie chart on fuel mix reveals substantial dependence on traditional sources like
fire wood (71 per cent), crop residues (5 per cent) and cow dung cakes (9 per cent).
The BIMARU states thus reveal a picture of failure as far as reducing dependence on kerosene
for lighting is concerned. The low dependence on kerosene as a source of fuel for cooking
has not gone hand in hand with higher use of LPG. There is considerable use of traditional
fuels like firewood, crop residue and cow dung cakes.
There is a huge opportunity and need for promoting use of solar home lighting, improved
cook-stoves and biogas plants. Suitable financial incentives are needed for these schemes
which should be viewed as “investment” and not “subsidy” given the attractive returns in
monetary terms by way of the subsidy saved on petroleum products. The additional health
benefits for mother and child, the lowering of carbon foot print and reduced imports are
added bonus.
Rural Odisha’s energy mix for cooking
Huge dependence of firewood and crop residue
Urban Odisha’s energy mix for cooking
Dependence on firewood significant

The East and the West – when will the twain meet?
The eastern and the western regions of India stand in stark contrast in most development
patterns. It is instructive to study this contrast to highlight the development gap in terms
of the basic household energy consumption—lighting and cooking. We do this by
comparing Odisha and West Bengal, on the one hand, and Maharashtra, Gujarat and Goa
on the other.
Rural Odisha depends considerably on kerosene for lighting even though there has been an
improvement in its coastal and western parts in 2011 compared to the situation in 2001.
However, the long compact south-north patch where more than 66 per cent households
depend on kerosene for lighting should be a cause for worry. In urban Odisha, too, there
are several sub-districts where more than 30 per cent households depend on kerosene for
lighting, and very few areas where this dependence is less than 10 per cent.
When we look at the sources of fuel for cooking purposes, rural Odisha shows a huge
dependence on firewood (71 per cent), crop residue (12 per cent) and cow dung cakes
(11 per cent). LPG use is meagre three per cent while usage of kerosene is insignificant (see
‘Rural Odisha’s energy mix for cooking’ p40). Urban Odisha, on the other hand, is able to
make available LPG to 46 per cent of its households even though the dependence on
Kerosene as source of lighting in rural West Bengal
Compared to 2001, the dependency on kerosene has come down substantially
Rural West Bengal’s energy mix for cooking
High dependence on firewood and crop residue
Urban West Bengal’s energy mix for cooking
LPG use is very high, so is the use of firewood, coal
41

42
firewood (35 per cent) remains significant. Coal stands at 6 per cent, which is the same as
West Bengal (‘Rural Odisha’s energy mix for cooking’ p40).
Urban West Bengal, notwithstanding its development and urbanisation, reveals a sizeable
region with more than 33 per cent households being dependent on kerosene for lighting
and very few sub-districts where this dependence is below 10 per cent. While rural West
Bengal has shown considerable improvement in 2011, compared to 2001, it has a number
of sub-districts where more than two-third households still depend on kerosene for lighting
(shown in red in ‘kerosene as source of lighting in rural West Bengal’ p41), while the area
where such dependence is below 33 per cent (shown in green) is rather small.
West Bengal shows certain different trends in use of fuel sources for cooking purpose both
in the rural and the urban areas. LPG use is pathetically low (4 per cent) while the
dependence on firewood (39 per cent) is comparable to that of crop residue (36 per cent).
Use of coal (3 per cent) is not significant—a picture that changes in urban areas
considerably (see ‘Rural and urban West Bengal’s energy mix for cooking’ p41).
Kerosene as source of lighting in urban Maharashtra
Has been successful in reducing dependency on kerosene
Kerosene as source of lighting in rural Maharashtra
Kerosene use has reduced considerably

43
Urban West Bengal does not score very well on LPG usage (48 per cent). Kerosene is used
by less than 6 per cent households and even this usage is confined to few pockets. The
reduced dependence on firewood (20 per cent) is partly on account of coal (18 per cent).
There is surely a case for introduction of improved cook stoves in urban West Bengal.
The western states: Even with a far more stringent benchmark of 10 per cent or more
households dependent on kerosene for lighting being shown in red, urban Maharashtra
has shown considerable improvement between 2001 and 2011, with sharp reduction in
the number of such sub-districts. Meanwhile, sub-districts where less than 4 per cent
households use kerosene for lighting (shown in green) has gone up significantly (see
‘Kerosene as source of light in urban Maharashtra p42).
Rural Maharashtra has not been so fortunate (see ‘Kerosene as source of light in rural
Maharashtra’ p42). While the number of sub-districts with more than 33 per cent
households dependent on kerosene has reduced considerably, most sub-districts remain in
the 15 per cent to 33 per cent band (shown in yellow), except the compact cluster in the
Kerosene as source of lighting in rural Gujarat
Compact clusters on eastern and northern periphery dependent on kerosene
Kerosene as source of lighting in urban Gujarat
Most sub-districts have less dependency on kerosene

44
coastal and western part (shown in green) and a small cluster around Nagpur. Maharashtra’s
southern neighbours have done better in this regard and so has rural Gujarat.
Rural Gujarat has reduced substantially the number of sub-districts where more than 15 per
cent households use kerosene. The couple of compact clusters on the eastern and northern
periphery should be a matter of concern for planers, though. The cluster where less than
6 per cent households use kerosene for lighting (shown in green) has expanded
considerably and contiguously (see ‘Kerosene as source of lighting in rural Gujarat’ p43).
Not surprisingly, urban Gujarat has performed well, bringing a majority of sub-districts
below the benchmark of 4 per cent households depending on kerosene for lighting. It is
certainly possible to step this up to cover all urban areas and make the bench mark even
tighter (see ‘Kerosene as source of lighting in urban Gujarat’ p43).
In terms of energy use for cooking, rural Gujarat has not done very well on LPG usage (14
per cent). Kerosene use is certainly low—less than 3 per cent households depend on it. But
Rural Gujarat’s energy mix for cooking
Low dependency on LPG
Urban Gujarat’s energy mix for cooking
Substantial dependency on firewood and kerosene
Rural Maharashtra’s energy mix for cooking
Urban Maharashtra’s energy mix for cooking
Substantial dependency on firewood and kerosene

the dependence on firewood (68 per cent) and crop residue (10 per cent) is substantial
though the use of cow dung is quite low (see ‘Rural Gujarat’s energy mix for cooking’ p44).
In urban Gujarat, LPG (68 per cent) and firewood (14 per cent) use pattern reverses, and,
although other sources are used very less, the use of kerosene (13 per cent) is significant.
Kerosene used as a source for lighting in rural Goa
Rural Goa has very little dependence on kerosene
Kerosene used as a source for lighting in urban Goa
Most of the sub-districts use less kerosene
45

46
Rural Maharashtra, too, does not score very well on LPG usage (18 per cent). There is a huge
dependence on firewood (69 per cent). Kerosene is used by just about 2 per cent of the
households. The pattern is quite similar to that seen for rural Gujarat. In urban
Maharashtra, LPG usage (74 per cent) is quite high, with rest of the space being accounted
for mainly by kerosene (12 per cent) and firewood (11 per cent) (see ‘Rural Gujarat’s energy
mix for cooking’ p44).
It is interesting to see how Goa fares against Gujarat and Maharashtra. Rural Goa has very
little dependence on kerosene for lighting and within this it presents an interesting east-
west divide (see ‘Kerosene as a source for lighting in rural Goa’ p45).
Urban Goa has done even better with hardly one sub-district (shown in red) having more
than 3 per cent households depending on kerosene for electricity, and a majority where the
number of such household is less than 2 per cent (shown in green) (see ‘Kerosene as a
source for lighting in urban Goa’ p45).
LPG usage (60 per cent) in rural Goa is impressive, with firewood (35 per cent) and kerosene
(3 per cent) accounting for the rest (see ‘Rural Goa’s energy mix for cooking’). There is
surely a case for introduction of improved cook stoves programme to its optimum given the
compact size of the state.
LPG consumption in urban Goa (81 per cent) is impressive by any standard. Firewood
(12 per cent) and kerosene (5 per cent) account for the rest (see ‘Urban Goa’s energy mix
for cooking’). Given the power availability, urban Goa could be a pilot for popularising the
forced draft blue flame cook stoves.
We thus see a stark contrast between the eastern and western states. The important question
in the context of the energy divide that emerges is “when will the twain meet–if at all”.
‘The electricity story in the Ishanya Kone (Sikkim and the seven sisters)’
The north-eastern states have their own energy consumption pattern. Almost all the states,
except Assam, have done very well in terms of providing electricity for lighting both urban
and rural areas. Most states, however, show heavy dependence on firewood for cooking: as
high as 92 per cent in Nagaland and 94 per cent in Tripura. The dependence on firewood
Rural Goa’s energy mix for cooking
High dependency on LPG
Urban Goa’s energy mix for cooking
High dependency on LPG

47
is considerable even in urban areas. The use of LPG in
urban areas is considerable in most states.
Use of kerosene is quite insignificant as a cooking fuel.
Interestingly, firewood continues to be used for cooking.
This makes a case for introducing and popularising
forced draft wood cook stoves. Given the efficiency of
these chulhas, considerable firewood can be saved. More
important, however, is the blue flame feature of these
cook stoves, which could improve indoor air quality.
We begin with Mizoram. Rural Mizoram boasts of a
considerable area where more than 80 per cent
households have access to electricity in green (see
‘Electricity as a source of lighting in rural Mizoram’ p47).
The improvement over 2001 is quite discernable in the
rest of the state too, except in Lawngtlai district, where
the coverage dipped lower than 2001 to 40 per cent. In
urban Mizoram, more than 95 per cent households have
access to electricity in most sub-districts.
Rural Mizoram’s energy mix for cooking
Urban Mizoram’s energy mix for cooking
Most areas have access to LPG
Electricity as a source of lighting in rural Mizoram
High penetration of electricity
Electricity as source of lighting in rural Nagaland
Most areas have access to electricity

The breakup of cooking fuel is the same in both rural and urban areas. In rural, 81 per cent
households use firewood and 18 per cent LPG (see ‘Rural Mizoram’s energy mix for cooking’
P47). In urban areas, 84 per cent households use LPG and 12 per cent firewood (see ‘Urban
Mizoram’s energy mix for cooking’ P47). Kerosene is used by about 3 per cent households.
Nagaland is another success story where most rural areas
have more than 85 per cent households with electricity
(shown in green in ‘Electricity as source of lighting in rural
Nagaland’ p47). The improvement over 2001 is quite striking
in rest of the state, too, except in the eastern part where the
coverage is low—in some cases below 40 per cent (shown in
red). In urban Nagaland, more than 90 per cent households
have access to electricity in most sub-districts.
Rural Nagaland shows huge dependency on firewood with
92 per cent households using it (see ‘Rural Nagaland’s energy
mix for cooking’ p48). Another 7 per cent use LPG. The
remaining fuel sources account for just 1 per cent. In urban
Nagaland (see ‘Urban Nagaland’s energy mix for cooking’
p48)), LPG is used by 53 per cent households, which is quite
low in comparison with other north-eastern states. Over 44
per cent urban households still use firewood, making it
Rural Nagaland’s energy mix for cooking
Extremely high dependency on firewood
Urban Nagaland’s energy mix for cooking
LPG usage lower than that of other north-eastern states
Rural Meghalaya’s energy mix for cooking
Overwhelming dependence on firewood
Urban Meghalaya’s energy mix for cooking
A balanced energy mix
Electricity as light source in rural Meghalaya
Comapred to 2001, access to electricity has improved
48

49
worthwhile to popularise forced draft wood cook stoves.
Meghalaya: Availability of electricity for lighting in rural Meghalaya has improved
considerably between 2001 and 2011 (see’ Electricity as light source in rural Meghalaya’
p48). Yet a majority of the sub-districts show coverage of
only between 15 and 67 per cent (shown in yellow). In
urban Meghalaya, the position is much better in 2011
with most sub-districts enjoying coverage of 87 per cent
or more households.
As regards sources of fuel for cooking, rural and urban
Meghalaya provide an interesting contrast. Rural
Meghalaya shows overwhelming dependence on
firewood at 94 per cent. In urban Meghalaya, the fuel mix
is quite broad (see ‘Rural and urban Meghalaya’s energy
mix for cooking’ p49).
Assam: Rural Assam has performed relatively poorly. Only one sub-district, Jorhat East, has
more than 70 per cent households with access to electricity. A large region of the state
shows less than 35 per cent households have such an access (shown in red). Even in urban
Assam, a large part has less than 80 per cent households
with access to electricity. Consequently, use of kerosene
for lighting is significant.
Rural Assam has large dependence on firewood (81 per
cent), with LPG accounting for just 10 per cent and crop
residue 8 per cent. Other sources are insignificant (see
‘Rural Assam’s energy mix for cooking’ p49). In urban
Assam, LPG (68 per cent) and firewood (26 per cent) cover
most of the usage, with kerosene accounting for just 3
per cent (see ‘Rural Assam’s energy mix for cooking’
p49).
Tripura: Rural Tripura has performed much better
compared to Assam in reducing dependence on kerosene
(see ‘Electricity as light source in Tripura’ p49). The
Rural Assam’s energy mix for cooking
Extremely high dependence on firewood
Urban Assam’s energy mix for cooking
Substantial dependence on firewood
Electricity as source of light in rural Assam
Limited access compared to other north-eastern states
Electricity as light source in rural Tripura
Dependency on kerosene has reduced

50
improvement between 2001 and 2011 is discernible except for a small area where less than
40 per cent households have access to electricity for lighting. Urban Tripura has done well
with most sub-districts, except three, showing more than 75 per cent households having
access to electricity.
Rural Tripura has the maximum dependence on
firewood (94 per net) with LPG accounting for just about
5 per cent (see ‘Rural Tripura’s energy mix for cooking’
p50). Other sources are insignificant. In urban Tripura,
the honours are evenly shared between LPG (50 per cent)
and firewood (47 per cent) with kerosene accounting for
just 3 per cent of the households, numbering only
around 4,000 (see ‘Urban Tripura’s energy mix for
cooking’ p50).
Manipur: Rural Manipur has also faired satisfactorily in
terms of providing electricity for lighting. The
improvement between 2001 and 2011 is discernible
except for a smaller area in the south-western corner
Rural Tripura’s energy mix for cooking
Alarmingly high dependency on firewood
Urban Tripura’s energy mix for cooking
Rural Manipur’s energy mix for cooking
High dependence on firewood
Urban Manipur’s energy mix for cooking
Electricity as source of light in rural Manipur
Dependency has gone down

51
where less than 25 per cent households have access to electricity for lighting.
Urban Manipur has shown improvement between 2001 and 2011 in terms of access of
households to electricity for lighting, but surprisingly, in certain part of the central region
the coverage has gone down in 2011 compared to 2001. This needs detailed scrutiny.
Rural Manipur shows considerable dependence on firewood as source of fuel for cooking
(Lawngtlai) and a low penetration of LPG (16 per cent). Other sources do not count for much
except coal (2 per cent) (see ‘Electricity as light source in rural Manipur’ p50). In urban
areas, too, LPG (57 per cent) and firewood (37 per cent) account for most of the fuel sources
with coal being used by about 4 per cent households (see ‘Rural and urban Manipur’s
energy mix for cooking’ p50).
Arunachal Pradesh: Rural Arunachal Pradesh has
improved access of households to electricity between
2001 and 2011. However, in many rural areas less
than 25 per cent households have access to electricity
(shown in red). Urban Arunachal has, of course, done
well by providing access to electricity.
Rural Arunachal shows huge dependence on fire
wood (85 per cent households) (see ‘Rural
Arunachal’s energy mix for cooking’ p50) with LPG
covering only 13 per cent of the households in
contrast to 78 per cent households in urban areas
having access to LPG. Firewood (19 per cent) and
kerosene (2 per cent) account for the rest (see ‘Urban
Arunachal’s energy mix for cooking’ p50).
Rural Arunachal’s energy mix for cooking
Urban Arunachal’s energy mix for cooking
High penetration of LPG
Electricity as source for lighting in rural Arunachal
Many areas have low electricity access

52
Sikkim: Rural Sikkim has performed remarkably well in
providing electricity (see ‘Electricity as light source in
rural Sikkim’ p51). The improvement between 2001 and
2011 is clearly discernible with most sub-divisions
showing more than 90 per cent households having
access to electricity for lighting (shown in green). In
urban Sikkim, the coverage is remarkable too with more
than 95 per cent households having access to electricity
in most sub-districts.
When it comes to sources for fuel for cooking, rural
Sikkim has a huge dependence on firewood (71 per cent)
followed by LPG (24 per cent) (see ‘Rural Sikkim’s energy
mix for cooking’). Other sources (5 per cent) are
insignificant, with kerosene accounting for 3 per cent out
of these. LPG usage in urban Sikkim is high at 85 per cent (see ‘Urban Sikkim’s energy mix
for cooking’). There are 9 per cent or just 3,000 households that use kerosene. The
availability of LPG for 85 per cent urban households and 71 per cent of rural households
continue using firewood raises an issue as to whether we are looking at purchasing power
being absent in rural areas or whether it is a logistics issue. Coexistence of electricity and
use of firewood for cooking perhaps provides an opportunity of looking at promoting
forced draft wood stoves.
We thus see that the north-eastern states present a different pattern of energy access. There
are some puzzles and some opportunities. The prime minister in one of his addresses
in the Northeast had emphasised the importance of keeping the energy situation in
right shape in the Ishanya (north-east in Vaastu) corner of our country. It is time we take
up this task.
Rural Sikkim’s energy mix for cooking
High dependence on firewood
Urban Sikkim’s energy mix for cooking
High penetration of LPG
Electricity as source of light in rural Sikkim
Dependency on kerosene has substantially reduced

53
W
e, thus, see that the state-wise analysis of energy consumption patterns both for
lighting and cooking gives a much more nuanced insight into the issue of energy
access. This is particularly because the maps reveal the clusters of deprivation.
They not only show whether the shoe pinches, but where it does. The rhetorical refrain
about India-Bharat divide comes alive both in the maps and in the pie-charts. The
inequalities in consumption, not withstanding individual resources in the rural sector, are
issues of infrastructure and governance and the failure to make LPG more easily available.
We also notice that while the extent of deprivation may come down, relative deprivation
is stable. The change from 2001 to 2011 brings this out in some detail. We also notice that
the “one-size-fits-all” formula will not work once we come to the specifics. States have
performed differently depending on their resource endowments as well governance
abilities. We also notice that the access issue has two dimensions—one infrastructural and
the other individual.
The analysis also opens up the debate over why the poor in some of the better-governed
states have better access to electricity and LPG compared to the non-poor in some richer
states. We also notice that solar home light has not been able to occupy the space occupied
by kerosene for lighting, and biogas has not been able to replace kerosene even in places
where cow dung is easily available.
We need to take into account the conterminous locations of electricity availability for
lighting and use of firewood for cooking. Propagation of improved cook stoves has to be
nuanced differently. Analysis of data from NCT of Delhi shows the need to look at the micro
data more carefully.
But this also underscores the opportunity and need for promoting the use of solar home
lighting, improved cook stoves and biogas plants—three important programmes which
have been forgotten in our obsession with solar energy. These three programmes pursued
appropriately will give much higher return, and more importantly help bring down the
subsidy burden in the two most subsidy-guzzling sectors of our economy—petroleum and
fertilisers. Suitable financial incentives are needed for these schemes which should be
viewed as “investment” and not “subsidy”, given the attractive returns in monetary terms,
in terms of the subsidy saved. The additional health benefits for women and children, the
lowering of carbon footprint and reduced imports are added bonus.
While regional disparities are noticeable, the better performance of the hill states is
noteworthy. This suggests the possibility of making various regions kerosene-free. One
needs to walk on both the legs—eliminate kerosene use from the better-performing states
and reduce the dependence on the fuel in some of the heavy-burden states through more
effective programmes.
We hope the analysis will contribute towards better policy design and in achieving the
desirable objective of “Tamaso ma jyotirgamaya” (Lead me from darkness to light), literally.
Conclusion
Energy access must be treated as investment for overall human development4

Chronology
1970: Graduated in Mechanical Engineering from Indian
Institute of Technology, Kanpur.
1973: Joined The Hindustan Times as a science journalist.
The Chipko Movement catalyses his understanding of
environment-development processes.
1982: Founder-director, Centre for Science and
Environment (CSE).
1983: Co-editor, First Citizen’s Report on the State of India’s
Environment.
1985: Co-editor, Second Citizen’s Report on the State of India’s
Environment.
1986: Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi invites him to address
the Council of Ministers.
1992: Started Down To Earth magazine.
1996: Began Right to Clean Air campaign, instrumental in
introducing CNG-based public transport in Delhi.
1997: With Dying Wisdom: the Rise, Fall and Potential of
India’s Traditional Water Harvesting Systems, started a
campaign to popularise rainwater harvesting. Making Water
Everybody’s Business was a subsequent seminal publication.
1997: Launched the Green Rating Project, aimed at
making industry more environment-friendly. Guided the
rating of the automobile industry, and the paper and pulp
industry.
1999: Co-editor, Green Politics, on global environmental
negotiations. Along with Poles Apart (2001), considered
important books on the Third World’s perspective on these
treaties.
Awards
2000: Padma Bhushan, Government of India, New Delhi
2000: Environment Leadership Award, given by the Global
Environment Facility, Washington DC
1994: Environmentalist of the Year by Les Realites de
l’Ecologie, France
1991: Distinguished Alumnus Award, Indian Institute of
Technology, Kanpur.
1987: Elected to the Global 500 Honour Roll by the
United Nations Environment Programme. Honour
Summus Award, Watumull Foundation, Hawaii.
1986: Padma Shri by the Government of India, New
Delhi.
1984: Fifth Vikram Sarabhai Memorial Award by the
Indian Council of Social Science Research, New
Delhi.
1979: First A. H. Boerma Award given by the Food
and Agriculture Organisation in Rom
Anil Agarwal 1947-2002
It is truly amazing how much he managed to do in
the past seven years. When we first found out he had
a rare and possibly fatal lymphoma, which had spread
to his brain, his spine and his eyes, his only response
was, “Is there a possible treatment?” He took
chemotherapy so calmly you would think it was a
simple stomach pain.
The focus, even then, was on work. Centre for
Science and Environment (CSE) had expanded,
started a fortnightly magazine, but with hardly any
management systems. In the US and then in France,
where Anil went for a bone marrow transplantation,
we worked furiously to set up internal systems. Anil’s
impatience drove colleagues up the wall. But he soon
learnt to also give his strength and generosity and,
most of all, his time. He died with the knowledge
that he had created an institution which would
continue to drive the environmental message, as
loudly and as stridently as he would have done.
In the 1980s it was generally accepted that
environment was “pretty trees and tigers” and that
“smoke was the sign of progress”. Poverty was the
greatest polluter. Anil debunked this effectively.
Environment for the poor was not a luxury but a
matter of survival. Today, all this is common
knowledge. But for someone who has journeyed with
him, I know how difficult each step was.
Our book, Global Warming in an Unequal World
forced us to fight the most powerful research
institutions of the industrialised world. The
campaign on air pollution made us take on the
powerful automobile industry. But Anil never ever
let us, even for one moment, feel that we were less
powerful. This is because his faith in democracy was
total. As long as we were absolutely sure about our
facts we could challenge the world.
“Forensic rigour combined with passion” was
how a leading UK journalist
described CSE’s work. My last
memory of him — barely
minutes before he died — was
Anil correcting me about
something I was saying to a
journalist on the phone
about a report on the auto
fuel policy. For Anil, life
began and ended with
work.
Sunita Narain

#AAD2015
Sunita Narain @sunitanar
Down To Earth magazine @down2earthindia
Centre for Science and Environment @cseindia
https://www.facebook.com/down2earthindia
https://www.facebook.com/cseindia

Contours of Energy Inequality, Anil Agarwal Dialogue 2015

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (15)

Similar to Contours of Energy Inequality, Anil Agarwal Dialogue 2015

Similar to Contours of Energy Inequality, Anil Agarwal Dialogue 2015 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Contours of Energy Inequality, Anil Agarwal Dialogue 2015